The explanation assisted REACT group retains its advantage on a delayed test nine weeks after the intervention despite score decline¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Both groups' delayed test scores decreased from post test, but the experimental group remained significantly higher (t(48)=2,599, p=0,012). → Eser Ültay & Nedim Alev 2017

Evidence¶

Eser Ültay & Nedim Alev 2017¶

Eser Ültay & Nedim Alev. (2017). Investigating the Effect of the Activities Based on Explanation Assisted REACT Strategy on Learning Impulse, Momentum and Collisions Topics. Journal of Education and Practice, Vol.8, No.7. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1137601

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Delayed IMCCT administered 9 weeks after the intervention in the same quasi-experiment. Means fell to Xexp =39,6 and Xcon =28,5, yet the difference remained "in favor of the experimental group".

"Additionally, there is significant difference between delayed tests of the experimental and control groups ( t(48) =2,599: p<0.05) in favor of the experimental group."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Individual control-group learners showed sharp declines in vocabulary scores from post-test to delayed post-test — related
• Instruction with the explanation assisted REACT strategy significantly eliminated some alternative conceptions about impulse, momentum and collisions — related
• The advantage of dual coding elucidation for correct lexical usage persists over a four-week delay — related
• Explanation assisted REACT strategy produces significantly higher post-test conceptual understanding of impulse, momentum and collisions than traditional teaching — related